Examination of Witnesses (Questions 40
- 59)
WEDNESDAY 24 JUNE 1998
Rt Hon Clare Short, Mrs Barbara Kelly, and Mr Graham
Stegmann.
40. That is not what the brief says.
(Clare Short) They are referring to
another UNICEF appeal in 1997. I personally do not have information
about that, no doubt I could get some, but that is a separate
question.
Mr Rowe
41. How do you judge, Secretary of State, whether
the quality of information coming to you from the NGOs on the
ground and so on is inadequate enough for you to need to send
somebody from your own Department out to vet it? Clearly in this
case you sent somebody out who came back with a very different
picture from the picture that your normal sources of information
provided. Presumably you cannot afford to send somebody out to
every crisis that comes your Department's way. I just wondered
how you formed the judgment that the information that is coming
is not right.
(Clare Short) What we have in our Department
for International Development is some of the best experience and
officials at doing this work in the world and that is recognised
by the peer review that is done. My officials have lived through
crisis after crisis and heard rumours and worries from NGOs. They
get to the point when they are worried and if there is no other
source of information they send someone. I rely on my officials
and they are good at what they do and they have been doing it
for a very long time. A lot of them have spent a lifetime doing
it. They are admired and respected internationally for the quality
of what they do.
Mrs Kingham
42. I would like to ask about the issue of information
as well because in the joint evaluation of the Rwanda tragedy,
the genocide and the ensuing humanitarian aid that was there,
there was quite a lot of criticism about UN agencies not having
adequate access to data and not disseminating that information
amongst different UN agencies and donor governments, etcetera.
Are you convinced that the World Food Programme and the UN agencies
have learned lessons from that and are really up to strength in
terms of their data collection? I notice in here, for example,
that the DEC voted unanimously not to have an appeal on Sudan
and then three weeks later decided that they would have an appeal
on Sudan and that the World Food Programme very quickly had reassessed
the amount of money it needed. Presumably the DEC was also working
on some of the information coming through from the World Food
Programme. Are you absolutely convinced lessons have been learned
and that stream of information is accurate and could not be improved?
(Clare Short) On the disaster of Rwanda,
as you know I was in Opposition at the time. I know the review.
I am not in a position to talk in detail about the lessons that
have been learned. Everyone who respects and cares about the United
Nations and knows that the international system needs it knows
that it needs to be more streamline and more efficient and this
very fine Secretary General that we have got now is leading that
process of reform and bringing all the different UN agencies together
to co-ordinate information, not to compete, to share endeavours,
to share information that is part of the process of reform. Improvements
are being made, but we are not there yet and there is room for
more improvement.
Ms King
43. We were talking about the possibility of being
able to transport things if we did get a ceasefire by road and
rail. How realistic are those plans?
(Clare Short) There was a train before,
a long time ago and the World Food Programme is saying they could
truck food from the north, but Barbara could provide more detail.
(Mrs Kelly) The train runs from Khartoum
to Wau. It is in a state that will run. It has not run as a relief
train for some time, but it is possible. The chosen choice of
WFP at the moment is to run a trucking fleet up from Northern
Uganda. There are some problems on the roads. This is one of the
things we will talk about tomorrow. WFP are in the process of
putting together, will have it on the table tomorrow, a project
to provide some temporary rebuilding of some of the road surfaces
because of the rains together with a proposal to have a dedicated
trucking fleet. A dedicated trucking fleet is something we have
had before. We had it in Ethiopia years ago. There are advantages
and disadvantages. The Ethiopia trucking fleet is sitting in mothballs
at the moment having no use. In Uganda there is a lot of private
sector trucking. One of the issues we will want to talk to WFP
about tomorrow is just how realistic are their trucking plans
in Northern Uganda. On the face of it they say that this is a
real possibility. It needs to be pushed a bit more. We need to
know a bit more. That is what their chosen option is at the moment.
Chairman: I am going to be very strict with
the Committee because we are running out of time. In order to
cover this subject we have to run down the questions we have got
in front of us. Ann Clwyd?
Ann Clwyd
44. The United Nations appealed in February for $109
million for Sudan. How much has so far been received?
(Clare Short) This is a repeat question.
It is another date but it is the same issue, ie, the nature of
UN appeals, the fact that they apply for a year and when money
is pledged they do not count it until it is dispersed. The UK
system agrees, there is a problem with the way in which they count
the money and talk about it. That I know and I have had the conversation
with Mr De Mello and I repeat that we and other governments have
made it clear that whatever is needed to buy the planes and buy
the food will be provided. For a more detailed answer I would
have to ask Barbara Kelly to respond.
45. Can I put it to you that, as Bernie said, in
1997 the UN received approximately 30 per cent of the funds it
appealed for from donors. The impact of that was grave, forcing
a severe cut-back in emergency services and food assistance. Already
in 1998 according to Carl Tintsman, the co-ordinator of Operation
Lifeline Sudan (South), the umbrella organisation for this activity
OLS relief operations had been hampered by lack of resources and
on 1 May the World Food Programme again appealed for more money.
They are short of money, are they not? You cannot possibly say
they are not short of money because governments never give the
total amount that the UN ask for and that is always going to be
the case?
(Clare Short) We are repeating ourselves,
Chair.
46. Can you answer that question please.
(Clare Short) I am answering the question
and I repeat we have said to Operation Lifeline Sudan, to the
World Food Programme, to all the others involved in this emergency,
privately and publicly, that the money will be found. There are
questions about appeals and how people measure it and when they
announce that they need an appeal and what percentage of it has
yet been fulfilled. They all know that the problem is not money.
I repeat people who want to help the people of Sudan ought to
concentrate on where the real problem is.
Mr Khabra
47. Given the increasing estimates over the last
few months of the numbers in need are you really confident that
the amount of the request is adequate? Would you also let us know
if there is any money available for other needs as well.
(Clare Short) As we have already said,
the need has escalated and we do not know how long it will go
on because of course the questions of planting for the next season,
how weak people are, whether they are on their lands will all
determine how long it goes on and whether it escalates to another
degree. There are problems in other areas of Sudan and as we get
closer to people, as Barbara Kelly said earlier, we will probably
uncover more need. A definitive answer is not possible because
if things go badly it will be even more disastrous. If there is
no planting in August and September then the crisis will go on
and escalate.
Ms King
48. Some of question 8 is reworking old ground but
the essential problem is about NGOs having the confidence that
they will have the money that has been pledged. I know you said
it is under discussion at the moment but previously 30 per cent
(that is a disputed figure) was received. So do you think NGOs
can be confident given their previous experience when their appeals
were not met that they will have the funds necessary?
(Clare Short) The irony of this is that
the original remark I made was made as part of an invitation to
the NGOs to come and talk to me about how we handle these emergencies
and whether I could agree with them transparent arrangements for
when there is an emergency on how the assistance flows through
NGOs, and which NGOs because you need to go through the ones which
are already there otherwise you get new NGOs coming in and that
was part of the problem in Rwanda in the past. So we do need improvements
and we agreed yesterday that we will have those discussions, but
I should make clear that NGOs, like everyone else, government
departments, MPs, human beings never say: "We have got enough
of everything."
Ms Follett
49. Secretary of State, you have said that the decision
by the Disasters Emergency Committee to launch an appeal reduced
the pressure on the SPLA to create a ceasefire. What evidence
do you have that this was so and what is the difference between
their appeal and aid by the British Government or by international
bodies?
(Clare Short) I appeal again to people
not to be obsessed with these things but to be obsessed with how
we can help the people of Sudan. My own judgment is that the early
pressure of international public opinion in the face of the first
pictures led to a change in the attitude of the government of
Sudan and permission for more flights. We were then in a position
where the government of Sudan were saying it would talk a ceasefire
and the southern factions of the SPLA were saying: "We absolutely
won't talk about it in any way." I heard Mr Garang myself
on Radio 4 saying: "It is up to the international community
to provide international assistance; it is nothing to do with
us." I think that is a shocking attitude when the people
he claims to be fighting to liberate are starving. My own judgement
is that mounting international public opinion having achieved
some change could go on with its pressure we might get the corridor
of tranquillity, the ceasefire, the truce. That is all my argument
was. It remains my view. I agreed with the NGOs yesterday that
there is room for an honourable difference of view. This is not
the biggest issue. It is the way the mad media behave that this
becomes the only issue but funnily enough it has carried the issue
of what is happening in Sudan on to the front pages so good comes
out of bad.
50. To go on with those front pages, is it the commentary
on the coverage of the famine in the Sudan which you consider
failed to emphasise the effects of the civil war and the need
for peace?
(Clare Short) My own view—this
is again in the original remarks—I was quoting a remark
by Richard Jolly about why across the world system we are living
at a time when there has been more progress and development than
ever before in human history and more people climbing out of poverty
in the last past 50 years than the previous 500, and yet there
is a pessimism about development and the constant decline in ODA
from governments. His argument was that two of the reasons are
constant media coverage of famine and these images of failure
and hopelessness and famine, and secondly a lot of NGO appeals
being about famine and that causes pessimism, of course, we do
not get the analytical articles. When there is a famine in Sudan
we suddenly get in the news terrible terrible pictures of starving
people with little context, so that people think I must give some
money but no one gives them access to information about how to
pressurise their government and other governments to do the follow
through politics to get a settlement or a truce and to get the
food through to the people. I think that is the problem about
all the coverage of these disasters. At the second meeting organised
by Media Watch we agreed there had been some review of media coverage—it
was One World Broadcasting, they give awards and monitor coverage
of development issues—and that we are going to have talks
with the media about this problem.
Mrs Kingham
51. First of all, I would like to say how welcome
your speech at the Despatches from a Disaster Zone Conference
was. I worked, as you know, in NGOs before getting elected to
Parliament and I was usually employed in the areas of communication
and fund-raising. It is a debate that is long overdue. I was very
picky about which NGOs I worked for because I think you have really
hit the nail on the head here in that the issue is about stopping
these famines and disasters happening time and time again and
not just bringing out the begging bowls each time asking for funds.
Having the political nous from NGOs to say: "Yes, of course
we will give humanitarian aid but make sure we do the political
lobbying to make sure these things do not happen in the long run."
It is incredibly welcome. However, having said that, I think there
was a lot of public concern about your comments about the DEC
appeal because people felt that you were saying do not give to
humanitarian aid. I note in one or two of your other speeches
you made the offer to the aid agencies that you would put up the
funds for humanitarian appeals so they could concentrate their
appeals on doing political work and public information to weed
out the root causes. In the case of this appeal would you have
stumped up the £6 million these agencies have already raised
through the DEC from your coffers so they could have directed
their efforts into making sure they did some good lobbying work?
(Clare Short) The original remark at
the Despatches from a Disaster Zone Conference was: "Why
don't you come and talk to me about the money we are making available
anyway, that we can guarantee to make available through you so
that we can all focus our energy on getting to the public the
questions of the causes so public opinion can help with that remedy."
That was always the original offer. I assume everyone realises
that because there is an access problem money raised here will
not get more food to people in Sudan until we have got it on trains,
planes or lorries and got it in. Everyone's energy and concern
leads to money pouring in and they are not being given explanations
and I think that is where the argument lies and it is an argument
that will continue and it means that the public's determination
to find a political answer is weakened.
52. I would love to see an end to disaster appeals
by NGOs and leave them to concentrate on doing the long-term lobbying
political work. However, when we have got commitments of 0.7 per
cent of GDP for our aid budget that is going to be quite difficult
if we do not move quite quickly towards meeting that commitment
if we are going to end up replacing that from different funds
in some way. Can we be given an assurance that you will carry
on lobbying to the Treasury and to other government departments
to make sure we get our aid levels up because it is inter-related?
(Clare Short) Firstly, I can give you
an absolute assurance. As you know, we are going through the Comprehensive
Spending Review now and announcements are expected for the whole
of government spending by mid-July and I can give you the absolute
assurance that the applications are in. Let me stress the fact
that we need more resources for long-term development. A shortage
of resources is not stopping responses to humanitarian disasters.
The actual spend has gone down because the absolute failure to
intervene in Rwanda and act earlier in Bosnia in my view led to
such a disastrous situation that the humanitarian disaster spend
went right up. The limit is not on spending for immediate humanitarian
disasters, the limit is on spending for long-term development
preventing humanitarian disasters from arising.
Mr Khabra
53. Should not NGOs have the freedom to appeal to
a variety of sources from their viewpoints, both to ensure adequate
resources and maintain their independence of factions?
(Clare Short) Absolutely. I was never
saying you do not have a right to appeal. I think if there had
not been an appeal for funds then pressure on the political causes
might have been greater. I assume that some day there will be
disagreements. There might be a government that will not supply
funds when NGOs think it is necessary. Then there would have to
be an appeal. I think it would be better if we could have a relationship
with NGOs where they know the money will flow through them, they
do not have to do that kind of appeal so their public education
and advocacy work is building a constituency of informed opinion
in Britain that will support advances in long-term development.
Mr Canavan
54. Although you were critical of the public appeal
for humanitarian assistance in the case of Sudan, do you see a
place in any circumstances for such public appeals in complex
emergency situations?
(Clare Short) As I have just said, in
these emergencies the vast sums that are needed mean donors across
the world have to be the main players and my own view is it would
be better. That is how this all started. I said to the NGOs: "Can
we talk about this?" If we could make agreements with NGOs
on a transparent basis, not: "You are giving something to
this and not this," on a set of principles about how we did
the disbursement so that they would know that when emergencies
were on, if they are working in the field, money would flow through
them so that they would rarely need to make appeals of this kind
that stress famine disaster and could do more of the advocacy
for progress in development, that would be up to them. Of course,
they would continue to raise money. Over the years I have made
my contributions to development organisations to support progress
in development and it is very important there are voices other
than government. The argument is about the nature of the appeal
in the middle of an emergency and what effect it has on the long-term
image of progress and development and then the specifics of any
particular appeal.
55. You have not had a very good press throughout
all of this and there seems to be almost a conflict between your
Department and yourself and many of the NGOs, possibly most of
the NGOs. Do you now in retrospect regret any of the public comments
that you have made about the situation?
(Clare Short) As I said earlier, I had
a meeting with the main NGOs yesterday and it was a good meeting
and we agreed that the priorities are access and political solutions
to the problem. Secondly, as I have said, although there is this
constant misreporting which is just the world of the media that
we have to live in, the original remarks I made (there is a transcript)
are very serious remarks and we need a very serious discussion
about it and I meant those remarks. Obviously I regret the misreporting,
but, as I said earlier, the good that comes out of bad is that
we have had a big public debate about the nature of our assistance
to Sudan and I think that is beneficial. I do not think that all
the coverage has been entirely damaging. There have been some
very important thoughtful articles about this whole set of questions
that I think have enhanced the quality of the public debate.
Chairman
56. Do you regret that interview with Jonathon Dimbleby
in which he did not really permit you to develop your argument?
We heard more of what Jonathon Dimbleby thought than what you
thought.
(Clare Short) That was prearranged before
this argument blew up. So a programme that would have been a serious
high level political programme about development and progress
that could be made became a programme about this argument and,
as you say, I feel at times it became a little unbalanced.
Mr Rowe
57. Secretary of State, we heard yesterday that the
government of Sudan is conscripting 650,000 new soldiers. Do you
really think that a ceasefire at a time when the Southern forces
are doing better than they have done up to now is either realistic
or going to help in the resolution of this problem in the long
term?
(Clare Short) As I said right at the
beginning, there is the international political writing-off of
Sudan, the feeling that it is an endless war and no one can do
anything, but there are lots of the neighbouring countries and
some countries internationally that have ended up favouring one
side or the other and therefore helped to feed the continuation
of war. It is my judgment that by war there will not be an answer
for any of the people of Sudan and some of the rightful complaints
of the people of Southern Sudan will never be resolved by war
and that it is doing untold damage to the people. Is a ceasefire
realistic? At the beginning everyone said to me it was not realistic,
just give the humanitarian aid, nothing can be done. I believe
we should not just keep propping up the war economy so that they
can be ravaged by the next crisis. We have made some progress
and we need to do more to persuade some of the players that support
the SPLA to protect the interests of the people of Southern Sudan
better by encouraging a peace process that secures proper protection
and respect for the needs of the people of Southern Sudan and
that is my own serious judgment. We have made some progress. Even
if it is difficult, you have to try, but I think everyone of goodwill
who cares for the people of Sudan should get behind that effort.
Mr Grant
58. You criticise the DEC for having an appeal. If
there is enough money and resources, why did the DEC have an appeal?
(Clare Short) I suggest you address
that question to them.
59. Why? Do you not know?
(Clare Short) It is not for me to say.
I was not at the meeting.
| 
